Our Moral Decay Will bear A Bitter Fruit Indeed..

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The Rule of law, Liberty, Democracy and Sovereignty ARE the fundamental strengths of America.. Obvious that the democratic process is often messy and full of strife, however it makes the political system responsive to a large and multi-cultural blend of peoples from all over the globe. This has given rise to the great strengths our nation has enjoyed and used so successfully to survive. We should consider that America’s top competitors and greatest enemies lack such a huge and vital advantage and instead of abandoning it we should promote it ! ----------------In the rest of the world the basic foundation of morality, justice and the Rule of Law that our nation has most of its existence fostered does not exist and has in its place a system of greed, corruption and distrust of higher principles that social decay and poor leadership tends to promote. This huge difference in leaders past and those presently in charge has been why our political and civil liberties have been eroded so greatly. The utter absence of accountability on the part of those who control political power has launched us down this path towards darkness and ruin. -----------Therefore the big question is , are our great problems the end result of our decaying and dying morality. A morality based upon Judeo-Christian principles and insured by adherence to the Constitution as gifted to us by our founders? The short answer is yes. The correct answer that can be found by examining our moral decay is that it's fruits are the harvest we are now reaping. Sure it matters who the players are that lead the charge against decency and justice but in the end its our responsibility to reject those people and their policies. In that we have failed and most certainly will pay a heavy and deadly price. It is to late to attempt to bail water after the ship has sunk. We took more than just prayer out of our schools and now we shall pay the price. We are not guilt free and innocent in our current misery and future calamities. For we failed to stand up for honor, moral principles and basic civility in our daily lives. --Tyr

[Kathianne]

My friend, I think you have many salient points here, but I'm going to play devil's advocate for a bit. Not out of 'I can top you,' but rather to bring some heating of the brain cells. No offense is meant, it really is to make all of us think.


The Rule of law, Liberty, Democracy and Sovereignty ARE the fundamental strengths of America.. Obvious that the democratic process is often messy and full of strife, however it makes the political system responsive to a large and multi-cultural blend of peoples from all over the globe. This has given rise to the great strengths our nation has enjoyed and used so successfully to survive. Incredibly well said, though I might have added the caveat, 'until recently.'


We should consider that America’s top competitors and greatest enemies lack such a huge and vital advantage and instead of abandoning it we should promote it ! ----------------In the rest of the world the basic foundation of morality, justice and the Rule of Law that our nation has most of its existence fostered does not exist and has in its place a system of greed, corruption and distrust of higher principles that social decay and poor leadership tends to promote. I see this as a repudiation of Western Civilization, upon which our own system was built, (Shoulders of giants as it were), along with all other types of governments. All are without merit but the US? Really? China since it went communist, case made. China in ancient times? Sorry, they were a foundation to Western Civ. Yeah, I know they are Eastern, but even them, word got around at the trading posts.


This huge difference in leaders past and those presently in charge has been why our political and civil liberties have been eroded so greatly. The utter absence of accountability on the part of those who control political power has launched us down this path towards darkness and ruin. Really this needs some names named. Are your referring to Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt (which one or both?), Ike, Nixon...?


-----------Therefore the big question is , are our great problems the end result of our decaying and dying morality. A morality based upon Judeo-Christian principles and insured by adherence to the Constitution as gifted to us by our founders? The short answer is yes.


The correct answer, (ed. I'm assuming this is the 'long answer'), that can be found by examining our moral decay is that it's fruits are the harvest we are now reaping. Sure it matters who the players are that lead the charge against decency and justice (ed. Whom are you referring to with the moniker, 'players?') but in the end its our responsibility to reject those people and their policies. In that we have failed and most certainly will pay a heavy and deadly price. It is to late to attempt to bail water after the ship has sunk. We took more than just prayer out of our schools and now we shall pay the price. We are not guilt free and innocent in our current misery and future calamities. For we failed to stand up for honor, moral principles and basic civility in our daily lives. --Tyr

I can't reach your 'conclusion' which is what follows my last editorial remark, until I understand how you got there. Prayer out of schools wasn't a bad thing in my opinion, since I do believe that while we all have the right to believe what we do, no government should tell me that I must believe that abortion is right and I must support it through taxes. Pick your own example.

I've no problem with no prayers, no moments of silence in public schools. Those do not preclude the rights of each and every child to pray or not on their own dime. I do mind times out for any group, under any reason, for special times out.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

edit

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

My friend, I think you have many salient points here, but I'm going to play
<dir><dir>


</dir></dir>devil's advocate for a bit. Not out of 'I can top you,' but rather to bring some heating of the brain cells. No offense is meant, it really is to make all of us think. ------------------------------------------------------------1. Thank you ,no offense taken. Not sure I have all the answers being that I'm just a poor boy from the South that somehow managed to live far longer than I expected. Your questions and observations were all good in my opinion. I shall do my best to give my answers as feeble as they may or may not be.--Tyr


http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=661392#post661392)
The Rule of law, Liberty, Democracy and Sovereignty ARE the fundamental strengths of America.. Obvious that the democratic process is often messy and full of strife, however it makes the political system responsive to a large and multi-cultural blend of peoples from all over the globe. This has given rise to the great strengths our nation has enjoyed and used so successfully to survive.



Incredibly well said, though I might have added the caveat, 'until recently.'------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. AHHHH, yes that goes without saying simply because I was speaking to members here that all must surely know I hold the start of the true destruction of the nation's foundation began in earnest and with wicked purpose by Obama. Although I should have been more specific. The rush to complete gave me no time to proofread or correct my post.--Tyr

We should consider that America’s top competitors and greatest enemies lack such a huge and vital advantage and instead of abandoning it we should promote it ! ----------------In the rest of the world the basic foundation of morality, justice and the Rule of Law that our nation has most of its existence fostered does not exist and has in its place a system of greed, corruption and distrust of higher principles that social decay and poor leadership tends to promote.


I see this as a repudiation of Western Civilization, upon which our own system was built, (Shoulders of giants as it were), along with all other types of governments. All are without merit but the US? Really? China since it went communist, case made. China in ancient times? Sorry, they were a foundation to Western Civ. Yeah, I know they are Eastern, but even them, word got around at the trading posts. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3. Actually my citing "social decay" should have given a hint that I acknowledge that it wasn't always the case. All the great nations/empires led up to the great enlightenment that manifested itself in the creation of this nation. We are the greatest(or were) because we had the benefit of that foundation of knowledge and the blessing of God that gave brilliant men the inspiration to look at man as a servant and creature of God's plan. That insight gave rise to those men looking to create a testament to good over evil, to liberty over enslavement, to the right to pursue happiness without the undue and oppressive hindrances of overbearing governments or dictators. God blessed such a gift and so great an inspiration..-Tyr

This huge difference in leaders past and those presently in charge has been why our political and civil liberties have been eroded so greatly. The utter absence of accountability on the part of those who control political power has launched us down this path towards darkness and ruin.


Really this needs some names named. Are your referring to Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt (which one or both?), Ike, Nixon...? ---------------------------------------------------- 4. Obviously I did indeed reflect upon this nation's founders and the great men that led this nation thru times of turmoil, growing pains and war. As well as those that saw manifest destiny as the course to take for it brought this nation to the power to save the world twice, WW1 and WW2. This does no ignore our mistakes but points to the standard we applied to do what is right and the policy to free other peoples at the expense of our own blood, treasure and agony of enduring the millions of lives lost. I did consider to post the men I admire but thought better of it because I am old school and that's not much admired nor appreciated as of late. Now after greater consideration I see it would have been better. Live and learn..-Tyr

-----------Therefore the big question is , are our great problems the end result of our decaying and dying morality. A morality based upon Judeo-Christian principles and insured by adherence to the Constitution as gifted to us by our founders? The short answer is yes.



The correct answer, (ed. I'm assuming this is the 'long answer'), that can be found by examining our moral decay is that it's fruits are the harvest we are now reaping. Sure it matters who the players are that lead the charge against decency and justice (ed. Whom are you referring to with the moniker, 'players?') but in the end its our responsibility to reject those people and their policies. In that we have failed and most certainly will pay a heavy and deadly price. It is to late to attempt to bail water after the ship has sunk. We took more than just prayer out of our schools and now we shall pay the price. We are not guilt free and innocent in our current misery and future calamities. For we failed to stand up for honor, moral principles and basic civility in our daily lives. --Tyr ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------5. I decided against naming names because both parties and we that seek to hold onto our freedoms are all guilty of not doing right. Of not standing up and demanding that this accumulation of "cuts" be stopped before we bleed this much and grew this weak. My admission that we are also guilty that did not fight soon enough , hard enough and with the spirit that would have honored those that sacrificed so much to give us the freedom and blessings we have so often squandered! --Tyr ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I can't reach your 'conclusion' which is what follows my last editorial remark, until I understand how you got there. Prayer out of schools wasn't a bad thing in my opinion, since I do believe that while we all have the right to believe what we do, no government should tell me that I must believe that abortion is right and I must support it through taxes. Pick your own example.

I've no problem with no prayers, no moments of silence in public schools. Those do not preclude the rights of each and every child to pray or not on their own dime. I do mind times out for any group, under any reason, for special times out. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- 6. My conclusions did include more than just the prayer removed from school but I marked that as the point it all headed downhill and was going to reap a bitter harvest for we are what our kids and grandkids are going to be and do IMHO. Your reaching your own conclusions is the right way to go. I made this post hoping it would give cause to the reader to think, and think with their heart and their mind. Certainly appears that wish bore fruit with you. Bravo, I never doubted for a moment about the quality of a reply that may come from either you Kat or Abbey should either of you ladies choose to honor me with a reply..--Tyr
Did my best to answer.. -Tyr

[Arbo]

Am I understanding the OP right? This is a call for more religion in society?

The whole 'we need religion' to be moral is where I most often verge away from 'the right'. I view religion as a crutch used by those that don't want to face the reality that when they die they are dead and that's it, and it is not required for society to function.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Am I understanding the OP right? This is a call for more religion in society?

The whole 'we need religion' to be moral is where I most often verge away from 'the right'. I view religion as a crutch used by those that don't want to face the reality that when they die they are dead and that's it, and it is not required for society to function. Actually its a call for people to elect better leaders, reform our education system and start standing on ethical principles instead of apathy, selling out to the highest bidder and always blaming everybody else for their failures/problems. Got to educate them before they'll understand and shoulder their civic responsibility. When society crumbles a nation is sure to soon follow. Our moral decay is the greater part of why we are in the state we are currently in. A man can be moral and honorable without religion but its damn sure much harder! We have plenty of churches ,what we no longer have is an effective and successful education system. --Tyr

[Arbo]

Got to educate them before they'll understand and shoulder their civic responsibility.

That's not going to happen as long as government is running the schools.


A man can be moral and honorable without religion but its damn sure much harder!

Utter nonsense.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's not going to happen as long as government is running the schools. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Exactly my point... congrats you win a lifetime subscription to Mad magazine and one slightly used 8 track tape of Steppenwolf.- :laugh:--Tyr



Utter nonsense. As to the utter nonsense reply , you are wrong. My Indian grandfather never attended a day of church in his life . He was an honorable man. He did not lie, steal or cheat. He did not use people nor live off of the government. I guess it could depend upon ones definition of honorable but he surely qualifies in my definition. By the way , your use of such a reply without listing why you believe it be so reveals something to me that I will await further evidence of in your future posts before inquiry directly to you about but inquire I will at some point in the future. -Tyr

[Arbo]

My 'utter nonsense' was not about a non-religious person being able to be moral. It was about the 'hard if not' part. Most of the immoral people I have ever known were religious.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

My 'utter nonsense' was not about a non-religious person being able to be moral. It was about the 'hard if not' part. Most of the immoral people I have ever known were religious. I suggest that you stop hanging around that lousy bunch of pretenders then. No different than when I was young and new guys tried to hang with us by pretending they were tough. That kind of tough you just can't fake. Five weeks was the longest any of them ever lasted. So according to your comment I'd say you should look for better company.. And you've led a very sheltered life. More power to you but that doesn't make your experience the majority one IMHO .--Tyr

[Arbo]

I suggest that you stop hanging around that lousy bunch of pretenders then. No different than when I was young and new guys tried to hang with us by pretending they were tough. That kind of tough you just can't fake. Five weeks was the longest any of them ever lasted. So according to your comment I'd say you should look for better company.. And you've led a very sheltered life. More power to you but that doesn't make your experience the majority one IMHO .--Tyr

So you are either a 'bible thumper', or ignorant of reality. At least I have figured that out quickly and now to to not bother with any interactions with you, as logic and reason are not present. Sheltered life, man that is some funny crap cause it's so so so so off base.

[Abbey Marie]

Am I understanding the OP right? This is a call for more religion in society?

The whole 'we need religion' to be moral is where I most often verge away from 'the right'. I view religion as a crutch used by those that don't want to face the reality that when they die they are dead and that's it, and it is not required for society to function.

Until someone comes back from the dead and tells us, no one knows what will happen when we die. Millions upon millions of us have faith that the God of the Bible exists, and all of the promises contained therein are real. Tell us, how do you KNOW that we are "dead and that's it"? I can't wait to hear your proof that there is no soul, no God, and no everlasting life. And btw, there is much, much more to a believer's "religion" than a crutch to avoid the fear of death. Have you not met people for whom that is true? You couldn't possibly be really listening if that is the case.

[tailfins]

The Rule of law, Liberty, Democracy and Sovereignty ARE the fundamental strengths of America.. Obvious that the democratic process is often messy and full of strife, however it makes the political system responsive to a large and multi-cultural blend of peoples from all over the globe. This has given rise to the great strengths our nation has enjoyed and used so successfully to survive. We should consider that America’s top competitors and greatest enemies lack such a huge and vital advantage and instead of abandoning it we should promote it ! ----------------In the rest of the world the basic foundation of morality, justice and the Rule of Law that our nation has most of its existence fostered does not exist and has in its place a system of greed, corruption and distrust of higher principles that social decay and poor leadership tends to promote. This huge difference in leaders past and those presently in charge has been why our political and civil liberties have been eroded so greatly. The utter absence of accountability on the part of those who control political power has launched us down this path towards darkness and ruin. -----------Therefore the big question is , are our great problems the end result of our decaying and dying morality. A morality based upon Judeo-Christian principles and insured by adherence to the Constitution as gifted to us by our founders? The short answer is yes. The correct answer that can be found by examining our moral decay is that it's fruits are the harvest we are now reaping. Sure it matters who the players are that lead the charge against decency and justice but in the end its our responsibility to reject those people and their policies. In that we have failed and most certainly will pay a heavy and deadly price. It is to late to attempt to bail water after the ship has sunk. We took more than just prayer out of our schools and now we shall pay the price. We are not guilt free and innocent in our current misery and future calamities. For we failed to stand up for honor, moral principles and basic civility in our daily lives. --Tyr


Having the right faith is useless to society when laziness takes over. Again, I blame all this on the laziness that has overtaken the faithful.

[Arbo]

I can't wait to hear your proof that there is no soul, no God, and no everlasting life.

Yeah, I do not have that outstanding 'proof' that the religious have. There's being 'but of course it's true, because the bible says so!'. LOL.

Religions have been copying each other since the start of 'religion'. The tales the bible tells are the same tales other religions told long before Christianity came along. It's all great stuff to keep people under/in control. Not much else.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So you are either a 'bible thumper', or ignorant of reality. At least I have figured that out quickly and now to to not bother with any interactions with you, as logic and reason are not present. Sheltered life, man that is some funny crap cause it's so so so so off base. That's amazing, I have 8,161 posts here and nobody ever called me a bible thumper yet you made that judgment in less than a week and based on a couple posts. Also amazing that you stutter when you type. --------------------------------- see bolded above.. Also amazing how fast you trumped up an excuse to ignore me. I guess that's alright with skin as thin as you have you couldn't hang .. what are you? a teenager?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Yeah, I do not have that outstanding 'proof' that the religious have. There's being 'but of course it's true, because the bible says so!'. LOL.

Religions have been copying each other since the start of 'religion'. The tales the bible tells are the same tales other religions told long before Christianity came along. It's all great stuff to keep people under/in control. Not much else. Rejecting God and hating Christians is great self delusion for people wanting to do as they please and never have to fear any punishment in an afterlife. Simply a form of cowardice really. And you started on Christianity right off the bat too. What's your take on Islam?:laugh:--Tyr

[Arbo]

That's amazing, I have 8,161 posts here and nobody ever called me a bible thumper yet you made that judgment in less than a week and based on a couple posts. Also amazing that you stutter when you type. --------------------------------- see bolded above.. Also amazing how fast you trumped up an excuse to ignore me. I guess that's alright with skin as thin as you have you couldn't hang .. what are you? a teenager?

So you are continuing down the path of misjudging everything you see? Very well, if that is what you do, it's simply what you do. It has been noted.

[Arbo]

Rejecting God and hating Christians is great self delusion for people wanting to do as they please and never have to fear any punishment in an afterlife. Simply a form of cowardice really. And you started on Christianity right off the bat too. What's your take on Islam?:laugh:--Tyr

1) You can not reject what is not real.
2) I never said I 'hated' them, or anyone else, I merely stood against your silly belief that religion is needed to be moral, or that it is easier to be moral if you are religious.
3) If one does not believe in religion, they do not believe in an afterlife OR 'punishment' for violating the tenants of imaginary spaghetti monster in the sky.
4) Is it normal behavior for a Christian to call those that do not believe in the same things 'cowards'? Or is that against christian teachings?
5) ALL religion is a farce.

[tailfins]

So you are either a 'bible thumper', or ignorant of reality. At least I have figured that out quickly and now to to not bother with any interactions with you, as logic and reason are not present. Sheltered life, man that is some funny crap cause it's so so so so off base.

I'm a Bible thumper and proud of it! Repent or burn in an everlasting hell!

[Arbo]

I'm a Bible thumper and proud of it! Repent or burn in an everlasting hell!

Nah, I'll not 'repent', and we can promise to not meet in the non-existent afterlife. Ok? ;)

[aboutime]

1) You can not reject what is not real.
2) I never said I 'hated' them, or anyone else, I merely stood against your silly belief that religion is needed to be moral, or that it is easier to be moral if you are religious.
3) If one does not believe in religion, they do not believe in an afterlife OR 'punishment' for violating the tenants of imaginary spaghetti monster in the sky.
4) Is it normal behavior for a Christian to call those that do not believe in the same things 'cowards'? Or is that against christian teachings?
5) ALL religion is a farce.


Arbo. I will happily agree with your declaration number 5), while, at the same time. I offer my own number 6) that Atheism, and calling one's self AGNOSTIC, is also a farce if there is nothing real to reject.

[Arbo]

Arbo. I will happily agree with your declaration number 5), while, at the same time. I offer my own number 6) that Atheism, and calling one's self AGNOSTIC, is also a farce if there is nothing real to reject.

You have a point. I don't call myself any such thing. I merely do not believe religion is real. I don't label myself for that belief.

[aboutime]

You have a point. I don't call myself any such thing. I merely do not believe religion is real. I don't label myself for that belief.


That sounds like a really good excuse. Don't own up to being anything to avoid being labeled?

If you are unidentified...as you claim. Then nobody has to listen, or believe what you say.

You are the SCOREBOARD, and after every game (opinion), you clear the BOARD, and start all over.

What a convenient way to AVOID discussions?

[Arbo]

That sounds like a really good excuse. Don't own up to being anything to avoid being labeled?

If you are unidentified...as you claim. Then nobody has to listen, or believe what you say.

You are the SCOREBOARD, and after every game (opinion), you clear the BOARD, and start all over.

What a convenient way to AVOID discussions?

Boy, there's a load of misunderstanding in all that.

I have never called myself any term in relation to religion, I merely do not believe any religion to be real. It really is that simple.

Clearly I am not avoiding anything, I am on a forum where it appears the majority are religious and here I am telling them they believe in fairy tales. Doesn't seem like avoidance to me.

That anyone needs a label put on someone in order to listen to what they have to say is beyond pathetic. It is the content of what is said that matters, not who it comes from, or what label someone has attached to them.

[aboutime]

Boy, there's a load of misunderstanding in all that.

I have never called myself any term in relation to religion, I merely do not believe any religion to be real. It really is that simple.

Clearly I am not avoiding anything, I am on a forum where it appears the majority are religious and here I am telling them they believe in fairy tales. Doesn't seem like avoidance to me.

That anyone needs a label put on someone in order to listen to what they have to say is beyond pathetic. It is the content of what is said that matters, not who it comes from, or what label someone has attached to them.


So, you do the very thing you claim you do not do by using the word religion. You labeled everyone yourself by distinguishing yourself from the rest of us by calling what we believe in, as fairy tales. That appears to be pure HYPOCRISY to me.
You can't have it both ways.
So. I suggest not saying anything more.

[Kathianne]

So, you do the very thing you claim you do not do by using the word religion. You labeled everyone yourself by distinguishing yourself from the rest of us by calling what we believe in, as fairy tales. That appears to be pure HYPOCRISY to me.
You can't have it both ways.
So. I suggest not saying anything more.

I do think he can say plenty more, that is the purpose of this forum. It seems obvious he's an atheist, why are you stringing this out? For that matter, why is he? He's an atheist. No harm, no foul.

[Arbo]

So, you do the very thing you claim you do not do by using the word religion. You labeled everyone yourself by distinguishing yourself from the rest of us by calling what we believe in, as fairy tales.

This doesn't even begin to make sense.


I do think he can say plenty more, that is the purpose of this forum. It seems obvious he's an atheist, why are you stringing this out? For that matter, why is he? He's an atheist. No harm, no foul.

If atheist means I believe all religions are just man made 'belief systems' that were originally made to explain what man was not advanced enough to explain, and to control populations of people, then sure, call me that. It seems there are many different and conflicting definitions, most of which would not apply to me.

[Kathianne]

This doesn't even begin to make sense.



If atheist means I believe all religions are just man made 'belief systems' that were originally made to explain what man was not advanced enough to explain, and to control populations of people, then sure, call me that. It seems there are many different and conflicting definitions, most of which would not apply to me.

Basic: No creator. No gods, nothing beyond what Is.

Simple enough?

[Arbo]

Basic: No creator. No gods, nothing beyond what Is.

Simple enough?

If that is what you want to call me, go for it.

[Kathianne]

If that is what you want to call me, go for it.

Nah, with that I'll call you, 'not worthy of responding to after this one.' Have a great night.

[Arbo]

Nah, with that I'll call you, 'not worthy of responding to after this one.' Have a great night.

Lame, but not unexpected. People talk about having thick skin, but say you don't believe as they do, and their actions show that skin isn't so thick after all.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Boy, there's a load of misunderstanding in all that.

I have never called myself any term in relation to religion, I merely do not believe any religion to be real. It really is that simple.

Clearly I am not avoiding anything, I am on a forum where it appears the majority are religious and here I am telling them they believe in fairy tales. Doesn't seem like avoidance to me.

That anyone needs a label put on someone in order to listen to what they have to say is beyond pathetic. It is the content of what is said that matters, not who it comes from, or what label someone has attached to them. ^^^^^^^^ Yet you called me a "BIBLE THUMPER" then dismissed me as being not worthy to respond to. You really need to practice what you preach. I have over 8k posts here and over 90% of those posts are not in the religion section here. I'd say its you that is quick to judge in error. -Tyr

[Arbo]

^^^^^^^^ Yet you called me a "BIBLE THUMPER" then dismissed me as being not worthy to respond to. You really need to practice what you preach. I have over 8k posts here and over 90% of those posts are not in the religion section here. I'd say its you that is quick to judge in error. -Tyr

What I said was: "So you are either a 'bible thumper', or ignorant of reality." Please ensure you get things right, rather than making them up. And no longer listening to you is based on a lack of logic or reason as seen so far. It is irrelevant how many posts your have or where they are on the forum. From what I saw at that point, it was clear emotion was what was being operated on, nothing more.

It is noted that rather than reply to my last reply to you, you picked a message I wrote to someone else, thus avoiding having to answer/respond to what was put out to you.

[Kathianne]

^^^^^^^^ Yet you called me a "BIBLE THUMPER" then dismissed me as being not worthy to respond to. You really need to practice what you preach. I have over 8k posts here and over 90% of those posts are not in the religion section here. I'd say its you that is quick to judge in error. -Tyr

Yep, we've a troll with anti-religion leanings, unwilling to admit to such.

I like Noir and support him against the 'religious.' LOL! My religion allows more nuance, be it right or wrong. I've admiration for those that say, "I'm an atheist." Or "vegan" may be the same or not. ;)

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

What I said was: "So you are either a 'bible thumper', or ignorant of reality." Please ensure you get things right, rather than making them up. And no longer listening to you is based on a lack of logic or reason as seen so far. It is irrelevant how many posts your have or where they are on the forum. From what I saw at that point, it was clear emotion was what was being operated on, nothing more.

It is noted that rather than reply to my last reply to you, you picked a message I wrote to someone else, thus avoiding having to answer/respond to what was put out to you.

That's a load of bull. I replied to your post.. However you do not get to instruct me in how, when, why and/or where I reply. Others brighter than you have tried for well over a decade --NONE- succeeded!! What's next, you going to call me a troll!?? - :laugh2: -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Lame, but not unexpected. People talk about having thick skin, but say you don't believe as they do, and their actions show that skin isn't so thick after all. You couldn't hold Kat a light to go by. WORD--- Don't bite off more than you can chew.. :slap:--Tyr

[aboutime]

That's a load of bull. I replied to your post.. However you do not get to instruct me in how, when, why and/or where I reply. Others brighter than you have tried for well over a decade --NONE- succeeded!! What's next, you going to call me a troll!?? - :laugh2: -Tyr


Tyr. Seems like Arbo sounds very much like someone else who tried the very same tactic not long ago.
We've all seen it before. A new member arrives. Pretends to be genuine, and after somewhat of an acceptance by members in the INTRODUCTIONS of the forum. That new member actually is convinced he/she is, and must be accepted as the FINAL voice to decide what other members say, think, and believe. And it shows by the way Arbo decided to identify some of us with his/her Bible Thumping accusations that exposed his/her Hypocrisy.

[Arbo]

Yep, we've a troll with anti-religion leanings, unwilling to admit to such.

As I have said, I do not believe in religions, seems that means I have admitted that um, I do not believe in religions. As far as anti-religion, you are making incorrect assumptions. Me personally not believing in religions does not mean I want them gone, or that I want them removed from society. People are free to believe in whatever they want. That's part of the freedom of this country.

So I'd suggest you quit making assumptions, as so far, your track record isn't very good.


That's a load of bull. I replied to your post..

Can you point out where you replied to post #18?

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?42703-Our-Moral-Decay-Will-bear-A-Bitter-Fruit-Indeed&p=661631#post661631

Go for it. Prove your claim of 'bull', let's see it. This will be entertaining, since you did not reply to it.

[Arbo]

You couldn't hold Kat a light to go by.

Is this in english? lol

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Is this in english? lol Sure it is. Very likely you are too young to understand. Google it if you are that clueless, as I haven't time to babysit you. :laugh:

[Arbo]

Sure it is.

How about you give us your proof you responded to that message #18. It is noted you avoided responding to that request to post some other garbage.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Can you point out where you replied to post #18?

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?42703-Our-Moral-Decay-Will-bear-A-Bitter-Fruit-Indeed&p=661631#post661631

Go for it. Prove your claim of 'bull', let's see it. This will be entertaining, since you did not reply to it. Sure I did with my next post. Are you under some delusion that I must reply in some way you approve of? If you are, then , man are you going to be in for a rude awakening. Nobody gets to tell me how I must post as long as my posting stays within the rules set by this forum. Where the hell do you nutcrackers come from any who?:laugh: I seem to remember this same little dance started my first week posting here about 14 months ago.. hmmmmmm? Yes, just about the same way too. And that guy is no longer here, seems he was permanently banned I believe. Although not over our disagreement but rather his nasty habit of thinking he was Ruler of the Universe and Jim had to set him straight. --Tyr

[tailfins]

Yep, we've a troll with anti-religion leanings, unwilling to admit to such.

I like Noir and support him against the 'religious.' LOL! My religion allows more nuance, be it right or wrong. I've admiration for those that say, "I'm an atheist." Or "vegan" may be the same or not. ;)

Why is he a troll? He's entitled to his opinions even if they are wrong.

[Kathianne]

Sure I did with my next post. Are you under some delusion that I must reply in some way you approve of? If you are, then , man are you going to be in for a rude awakening. Nobody gets to tell me how I must post as long as my posting stays within the rules set by this forum. Where the hell do you nutcrackers come from any who?:laugh: I seem to remember this same little dance started my first week posting here about 14 months ago.. hmmmmmm? Yes, just about the same way too. And that guy is no longer here, seems he was permanently banned I believe. Although not over our disagreement but rather his nasty habit of thinking he was Ruler of the Universe and Jim had to set him straight. --Tyr

As I said, seems to be a troll. Unless there is something to come, would recommend we ignore it. Just my take, unless jimnyc bans, which is unlikely.

[Arbo]

Sure I did with my next post.

100% lie.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

100% lie. So you say but for me I chose what part of your posts I wanted to address. Apparently your reading comprehension skills are a tad lacking or else you think those replying to you must do so in a manner of your choosing. And that is 100% stupid. Why would I let you dictate how I should reply ? Especially after you tried to call me a bible thumper and not worthy of consideration. For a newbie you sure seem as if you know a lot about members here or is erroneous snap judgments a passion of yours? :laugh:--Tyr

[Arbo]

So you say but for me I chose what part of your posts I wanted to address.

I have already noted this, you refuse to actually answer anything that will show you in a negative light, which in general means you probably do not answer many questions of significance, ever.

[aboutime]

How about you give us your proof you responded to that message #18. It is noted you avoided responding to that request to post some other garbage.


Arbo. As you have so carefully proven to most of us who remember former members very well.

Because YOU make such a demand, coming here and insisting someone prove something to you; means nothing. Since you are nobody important enough for any member to Obey, or Meet your demands.
Life's a biatch for you about now. SO. Since you are nobody. Please feel free to ignore, and even erase this post to nobody.

[Arbo]

Arbo.

I responded to a previous post with him, made some points and asked some questions. He did not respond to it. He has lied and said he did. These are facts. The rest of your post is meaningless drivel.

Yes, it is upsetting to the 'regulars' when someone comes along and challenges the normal order of 'yes men' that all are so used to. Quite frankly, I haven't seen much impressive here so far, at least not from the most vocal individuals.

[aboutime]

I responded to a previous post with him, made some points and asked some questions. He did not respond to it. He has lied and said he did. These are facts. The rest of your post is meaningless drivel.

Yes, it is upsetting to the 'regulars' when someone comes along and challenges the normal order of 'yes men' that all are so used to. Quite frankly, I haven't seen much impressive here so far, at least not from the most vocal individuals.

Of course not. The one, and only person you are impressed by, or with, is You. Must be pretty miserable always winning the arguments with YOURSELF.

[Arbo]

Of course not. The one, and only person you are impressed by, or with, is You.

And yet again your power of sight and intuition have proved to fail you. Congratulations.

The funny part about the whole thing is we merely have a few people that are pissed off because anyone dare question their 'religion'. On other topics, they are fine. So if you agree with them, you are cool, if you do not, they turn to pretty lame nonsense. Not a sign of good character.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I have already noted this, you refuse to actually answer anything that will show you in a negative light, which in general means you probably do not answer many questions of significance, ever. Yes, I still refuse to dance to the tune you want. You attempting to badger me into it will fail . Just as has all the others in the past. Hell, list a hundr3ed questions and I may decide to respond to 1 or 2 or 20 or 40 but its my choice not yours. You revealing your inner control freak a bit early aren't you?:laugh:-Tyr

[Arbo]

Yes, I still refuse to dance to the tune you want. You attempting to badger me into it will fail . Just as has all the others in the past. Hell, list a hundr3ed questions and I may decide to respond to 1 or 2 or 20 or 40 but its my choice not yours. You revealing your inner control freak a bit early aren't you?:laugh:-Tyr


You really have never heard that 'quit while you are ahead' phrase, have you? I didn't think so.

We have established you have told a lie. We have established a few people seem to lose their minds if you question their 'religion'. A few of those people have shown an immense lack of logic or reason.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

1) You can not reject what is not real.
2) I never said I 'hated' them, or anyone else, I merely stood against your silly belief that religion is needed to be moral, or that it is easier to be moral if you are religious.
3) If one does not believe in religion, they do not believe in an afterlife OR 'punishment' for violating the tenants of imaginary spaghetti monster in the sky.
4) Is it normal behavior for a Christian to call those that do not believe in the same things 'cowards'? Or is that against christian teachings?
5) ALL religion is a farce. 1. Sure I can. 2. Sure you did..3. I like spaghetti, eat mine loaded with cayenne pepper 4. Actually it's against Article One section 12 subsection BR549. PM Junior for any further instructions on it. 5. ALL farce is a religion. There just for you to stop your crying I answered all 5 of your brilliantly wonderful questions. Aren't you happy now? :laugh:--Tyr

[Arbo]

I hear the Turks are big into the butt buddy business.

Another assumption that makes you look foolish.


2. Sure you did..


Please feel free to quote where I said I 'hate' them. Otherwise you are yet again telling a lie.

All your other answers are failed jokes. Much like most anything you post, at least in this thread.

[Drummond]

Why is he a troll? He's entitled to his opinions even if they are wrong.

Just read through a couple of pages of Arbo's stuff.

As you say, he's entitled to an opinion. But this surely goes further. What characterises this individual as a troll is the way that posts are turned into the basis for antagonistic dialogue, that's to say, they're posted with that specific motivation chiefly in mind.

Disagreement is fine. I'd even suggest that barbs are 'fine', if in being pursued, a higher purpose showing loyalty to a reputable viewpoint is served, where the viewpoint IS the motivation. But what I see is antagonism where no good purpose follows from it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Another assumption that makes you look foolish.



Please feel free to quote where I said I 'hate' them. Otherwise you are yet again telling a lie.

All your other answers are failed jokes. Much like most anything you post, at least in this thread. If more than one person laughs a joke has not failed. I laughed and I bet at least one person here reading that post laughed too. The more you post the more you remind me of somebody, somebody that once did post here. .. I'll get it sooner or later. Carry on Garbo. ;)
Arbo, Japanese name for Ekans and Arbok, a fictional species in the Pokémon franchise --Are you a kid?? :laugh:

[Drummond]

Arbo, I'm in a different timezone to you, which is why I've no interest in crossing swords with you right now. But if you want to pick on someone in a future session, you can try your luck with me.

[Arbo]

What characterises this individual as a troll is the way that posts are turned into the basis for antagonistic dialogue, that's to say, they're posted with that specific motivation chiefly in mind.

Both a mind reader, and someone who doesn't see any antagonism from Try-Ziu or aboutme ... That comes in to comment on an individual, rather than the topic. Some might say that is being antagonistic.



Arbo, I'm in a different timezone to you, which is why I've no interest in crossing swords with you right now. But if you want to pick on someone in a future session, you can try your luck with me.

I am not here for such a purpose. However in this thread merely stating one does not believe in religion simply spun up a few folks. Perhaps you can discuss with them why someone that doesn't believe in religion causes them such great butt hurt.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Arbo, I'm in a different timezone to you, which is why I've no interest in crossing swords with you right now. But if you want to pick on someone in a future session, you can try your luck with me. You'd better use a rubber sword my friend. I suspect that its a kid that bruises easily. :laugh:--Tyr

[Drummond]

You'd better use a rubber sword my friend. I suspect that its a kid that bruises easily. :laugh:--Tyr:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

[Drummond]

Both a mind reader, and someone who doesn't see any antagonism from Try-Ziu or aboutme ... That comes in to comment on an individual, rather than the topic. Some might say that is being antagonistic.

I've a different word for you. Try 'REACTIVE'.

You set the pace. I reacted to it. Simple ...


I am not here for such a purpose. However in this thread merely stating one does not believe in religion simply spun up a few folks. Perhaps you can discuss with them why someone that doesn't believe in religion causes them such great butt hurt.

Personalising this rather a lot, aren't you ? To keep the contention going at the same antagonistic pitch ?

I'm signing off for the night, for the reason given previously. But we will presumably have further dialogues. I shall keep my rubber sword on standby ! :laugh:

[Arbo]

I've a different word for you. Try 'REACTIVE'.

You set the pace. I reacted to it. Simple ...



Personalising this rather a lot, aren't you ? To keep the contention going at the same antagonistic pitch ?

I'm signing off for the night, for the reason given previously. But we will presumably have further dialogues. I shall keep my rubber sword on standby ! :laugh:


Is there anyone on this forum that actually has a clue?

[aboutime]

Is there anyone on this forum that actually has a clue?


Since you asked. Why not tell us, and impress yourself again?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Is there anyone on this forum that actually has a clue? Many but apparently you are not one of them. We have several really smart members here . People that see well beyond the media propaganda headlines with no ring in their nose..--Tyr

[tailfins]

Just read through a couple of pages of Arbo's stuff.

As you say, he's entitled to an opinion. But this surely goes further. What characterises this individual as a troll is the way that posts are turned into the basis for antagonistic dialogue, that's to say, they're posted with that specific motivation chiefly in mind.

Disagreement is fine. I'd even suggest that barbs are 'fine', if in being pursued, a higher purpose showing loyalty to a reputable viewpoint is served, where the viewpoint IS the motivation. But what I see is antagonism where no good purpose follows from it.

Thanks for the detailed analysis. You did a good job in not demanding assumptions from the reader (me in this case) and giving a path to confirm your point of view.

[Abbey Marie]

Is there anyone on this forum that actually has a clue?

Hmm. Let's see:

You stated right out of the gate, on a board that is likely to be filled with Christians (given the percentage of Christians in the USA), that there is definitively no life after death, and strongly implied that said religious people are too ignorant to understand that they use their beliefs as a way of dealing with the finality of death. I ignored the insult, and asked you to show proof that there is no life after death. You admitted you could not.

Your post: Lacking any evidence, yet rather confrontational.
My post: Unemotional, acknowledging that we believe based on our faith and the Bible, and asking you a quite relevant question.

I think I know who has a clue. I will leave the "clueless" label for others to decide.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Yeah, I do not have that outstanding 'proof' that the religious have. There's being 'but of course it's true, because the bible says so!'. LOL.

Religions have been copying each other since the start of 'religion'. The tales the bible tells are the same tales other religions told long before Christianity came along. It's all great stuff to keep people under/in control. Not much else.

Please link to credible sources for these other religions and the 'same stories'... specifically, I'd like a link to other religions stories that match Genesis, Exodus, and the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, please.

I'll wait..........

[Arbo]

Abbey, so if a board is filled with Christians, one that believes in NO religion should just STFU? Seems to be the point many are making. Butt hurt because someone believes something other than what they believe. Noted.

One to start with Marcus:

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/gen1st.htm

More to chew on:


Written in 1280 BC, the Egyptian "Book of the Dead" describes a God, Horus, son of Goddess Isis.

Egyptian mythology predates the birth of Christianity by 1500 years.

Horus..

-Born Dec 25th.

-Born to a virgin mother(Isis), a virgin birth.

-Birth marked by a bright star in the sky.

-Birth announced by angels. Jesus' birth was announced by angels.

-born in a cave. Caves were used as stables. Laid in a manger.

-birth event witnessed by 3 wise men bearing gifts whom traveled from afar.

-during infancy, Herut tried to have Horus murdered. Herod tried to have Jesus murdered during infancy.

-Earthly father named Seb. The name/word Seb translates into Jo-seph.

-Both Horus and Jesus were baptized at age 30.

-Horus was crucified on a cross or tree between two thieves.

-after 3 days, 2 women announced Horus, the Saviour of humanity had been resurrected. Brought back from the dead to reign for 1000 years. The exact same destiny of Jesus.



Mithra- Persian god 600 BC

Mithra..

-born Dec 25th

-born to a virgin birth.

-Performed miracles

-crucified and resurrected 3 days later.

-known as the Lamb, The Way, The Truth, The Light, The Savior, The Messiah.

Krishna- India 1000 BC

-was a carpenter

-born of a virgin birth

-baptized in a river

Dyonisis, Greek mythological god.

Dyonisis..

-Born to a virgin mother, a virgin birth.

-turned water to wine, performed miracles.

-crucified and resurrected 3 days later.

-was called the Saviour of mankind.

-believed his followers should partake in a feast of his flesh and blood. The root of communion.

[Abbey Marie]

Abbey, so if a board is filled with Christians, one that believes in NO religion should just STFU? Seems to be the point many are making. Butt hurt because someone believes something other than what they believe. Noted.

One to start with Marcus:

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/gen1st.htm

More to chew on:

Well, I certainly never told you to shut up, let alone to STFU. Not my style. I welcome debate and other opinions. What I personally do not like, are sweeping condescending statements, especially right off the bat. But you are not being silenced either way.

Every once in awhile, we get a new member who seems to be here primarily to attack Christianity in particular. It's really not all that hard to see it when that is going on. If that is not your agenda, great. :cool:

I often wonder why non-believers feel such a strong urge to convince others to not believe in God. If you really think about it, very few people try to proselytize others. And if that is true, why not live and let live? Our member Gaffer is a good example of someone who does that very well. (And I don't think a bad experience in someone's past justifies a continual need to go at strangers for their beliefs. At some point we all need to move on).

[Marcus Aurelius]

Abbey, so if a board is filled with Christians, one that believes in NO religion should just STFU? Seems to be the point many are making. Butt hurt because someone believes something other than what they believe. Noted.

One to start with Marcus:

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/gen1st.htm


More to chew on:

Written in 1280 BC, the Egyptian "Book of the Dead" describes a God, Horus, son of Goddess Isis.

Egyptian mythology predates the birth of Christianity by 1500 years.

Horus..

-Born Dec 25th.

-Born to a virgin mother(Isis), a virgin birth.

-Birth marked by a bright star in the sky.

-Birth announced by angels. Jesus' birth was announced by angels.

-born in a cave. Caves were used as stables. Laid in a manger.

-birth event witnessed by 3 wise men bearing gifts whom traveled from afar.

-during infancy, Herut tried to have Horus murdered. Herod tried to have Jesus murdered during infancy.

-Earthly father named Seb. The name/word Seb translates into Jo-seph.

-Both Horus and Jesus were baptized at age 30.

-Horus was crucified on a cross or tree between two thieves.

-after 3 days, 2 women announced Horus, the Saviour of humanity had been resurrected. Brought back from the dead to reign for 1000 years. The exact same destiny of Jesus.



Mithra- Persian god 600 BC

Mithra..

-born Dec 25th

-born to a virgin birth.

-Performed miracles

-crucified and resurrected 3 days later.

-known as the Lamb, The Way, The Truth, The Light, The Savior, The Messiah.

Krishna- India 1000 BC

-was a carpenter

-born of a virgin birth

-baptized in a river

Dyonisis, Greek mythological god.

Dyonisis..

-Born to a virgin mother, a virgin birth.

-turned water to wine, performed miracles.

-crucified and resurrected 3 days later.

-was called the Saviour of mankind.

-believed his followers should partake in a feast of his flesh and blood. The root of communion.






Interesting... I ask you for speific LINKS to RELIGIONS that have the exact same story as Genesis, Exodus, and Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John...

You provide a link that in it's opening sentence CONFIRMS the old testament started with the Jews...

In the beginning, about 3,000 years ago*, Jewish desert dwellers in what is present-day southern Israel told a story around campfires about the creation of the first man and first woman.


Then, you post some two groups of non-linked bullet points, one about the 'Book of the Dead', and another about 'Mithra'. If this nonsense came from a credible source, why are you afraid to link to it?


In other words, you failed.


EDIT:

Further debunking of the Horus nonsense...

http://www.jonsorensen.net/2012/10/25/horus-manure-debunking-the-jesushorus-connection/

[cadet]

Word to the wise arbo.
Debating and bashing are two different things. Especially here.
One of the reason's this site is so successful is because many members here tend to post facts and then fight over said facts. Unlike many liberal debate sites where it's just throwing insults at each other and basically saying "You're dumb! Nu uh!!"

[Marcus Aurelius]

Arbo's further FAIL regarding Mithra...


http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10402a.htm

Relation to Christianity A similarity between Mithra and Christ struck even early observers, such as Justin (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08580c.htm), Tertullian (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14520c.htm), and other Fathers (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06001a.htm), and in recent times has been urged to prove that Christianity (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm) is but an adaptation of Mithraism, or at most the outcome of the same religious ideas (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07630a.htm) and aspirations (e.g. Robertson, "Pagan Christs", 1903). Against this erroneous (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05525a.htm) and unscientific procedure, which is not endorsed by the greatest living authority on Mithraism, the following considerations must be brought forward.

(1) Our knowledge (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) regarding Mithraism is very imperfect; some 600 brief inscriptions, mostly dedicatory, some 300 often fragmentary, exiguous, almost identical monuments, a few casual references in the Fathers (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06001a.htm) or Acts of the Martyrs, and a brief polemic against Mithraism which the Armenian (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01736b.htm) Eznig (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05739a.htm) about 450 probably copied from Theodore of Mopsuestia (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14571b.htm) (d. 428) who lived when Mithraism was almost a thing of the past — these are our only sources, unless we include the Avesta (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02151b.htm) in which Mithra is indeed mentioned, but which cannot be an authority for Roman Mithraism with which Christianity (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm) is compared. Our knowledge (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) is mostly ingenious guess-work; of the real inner working of Mithraism and the sense in which it was understood by those who professed it at the advent of Christianity (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm), we know (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) nothing.

(2) Some apparent similarities exist; but in a number of details it is quite probable that Mithraism was the borrower from Christianity (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm). Tertullian (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14520c.htm) about 200 could say: "hesterni sumus et omnia vestra implevimus" ("we are but of yesterday, yet your whole world is full of us"). It is not unnatural to suppose that a religion which filled the whole world, should have been copied at least in some details by another religion which was quite popular during the third century. Moreover the resemblances pointed out are superficial and external. Similarity in words and names is nothing; it is the sense that matters. During these centuries Christianity (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm) was coining its own technical terms, and naturally took names, terms, and expressions current in that day; and so did Mithraism. But under identical terms each system thought its own thoughts. Mithra is called a mediator; and so is Christ; but Mithra originally only in a cosmogonic (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04405c.htm) or astronomical (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02025a.htm) sense; Christ, being God (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm) and man, is by nature the Mediator between God (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm) and man. And so in similar instances. Mithraism had a Eucharist (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05572c.htm), but the idea (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07630a.htm) of a sacred banquet is as old as the human race (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09580c.htm) and existed at all ages and amongst all peoples. Mithra saved the world by sacrificing a bull; Christ by sacrificing Himself. It is hardly possible to conceive a more radical difference than that between Mithra taurochtonos and Christ crucified. Christ was born of a Virgin; there is nothing to prove that the same was believed of Mithra born from the rock. Christ was born in a cave; and Mithraists worshipped in a cave, but Mithra was born under a tree near a river. Much as been made of the presence of adoring shepherds; but their existence on sculptures (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13641b.htm) has not been proven, and considering that man had not yet appeared, it is an anachronism to suppose their presence.

(3) Christ was an historical personage, recently born in a well-known town of Judea (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08544a.htm), and crucified under a Roman governor, whose name figured in the ordinary official lists. Mithra was an abstraction, a personification not even of the sun but of the diffused daylight; his incarnation, if such it may be called, was supposed to have happened before the creation of the human race (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09580c.htm), before all history. The small Mithraic congregations were like masonic (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09771a.htm) lodges for a few and for men only and even those mostly of one class, the military; a religion that excludes the half of the human race (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15687b.htm) bears no comparison to the religion of Christ (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm). Mithraism was all comprehensive and tolerant of every other cult, the Pater Patrum himself was an adept in a number of other religions (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12738a.htm); Christianity (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm) was essential exclusive, condemning every other religion in the world, alone and unique in its majesty.

[Arbo]

Well, I certainly never told you to shut up, let alone to STFU. Not my style. I welcome debate and other opinions. What I personally do not like, are sweeping condescending statements, especially right off the bat. But you are not being silenced either way.

Every once in awhile, we get a new member who seems to be here primarily to attack Christianity in particular. It's really not all that hard to see it when that is going on. If that is not your agenda, great. :cool:

I often wonder why non-believers feel such a strong urge to convince others to not believe in God. If you really think about it, very few people try to proselytize others. And if that is true, why not live and let live? Our member Gaffer is a good example of someone who does that very well. (And I don't think a bad experience in someone's past justifies a continual need to go at strangers for their beliefs. At some point we all need to move on).

I would guess if the board that gets people that attack christianity, it might be some sort of 'fight back' against all the anti-islam stuff that get's posted? I don't know. But as I said in a previous post, I don't care what others believe, if they choose to have faith in some religion, that's there thing. This whole slide into attacks all started when I simply said that 1) I do not believe in religion and 2) one does not need religion to be moral.

I have never met anyone that has tried to convince others to forgo their belief in religion. I have seen a lot of religious people that push their religion though, from the 'America is a christian nation!' sort of threads, to all sorts of other issues where their religion is the backing source and all others are 'wrong' because 'god' says so. It doesn't bother me, but it's bad form when used in actual debate about non-religious issues.

So I have no intent on attacking any religion, I merely do not believe any of them to be real. Others obviously have different beliefs on this. But if I see someone say religion is 'needed' for something that it is not, I will mention that. Just like when someone on the left says something stupid and partisan, I will mention it. Or similar for someone on the right.

BTW, I appreciate your response, it was the first in a while to contain common sense and logic.

[Arbo]

One of the reason's this site is so successful is because many members here tend to post facts and then fight over said facts. Unlike many liberal debate sites where it's just throwing insults at each other and basically saying "You're dumb! Nu uh!!"

Having seen a few 'altercations' in different threads, mostly with another poster that appears to be Muslim, and reading the remarks to linked stories some make when starting a thread, it doesn't seem 'facts' are always the top priority. But I have only seem a few posters that do it over and over. So it doesn't appear (from an outsiders view) to be any different than most other forums. I am anxious to see more posters interacting, as some (like Abbey in this thread) seem to offer actual discussion.


Arbo's further FAIL regarding Mithra...

Oh my, a religious organization that is standing up for itself and saying it has nothing to do with previous religions. That's about as unbiased as something could be. :rolleyes:

[Drummond]

Having seen a few 'altercations' in different threads, mostly with another poster that appears to be Muslim, and reading the remarks to linked stories some make when starting a thread, it doesn't seem 'facts' are always the top priority. But I have only seem a few posters that do it over and over. So it doesn't appear (from an outsiders view) to be any different than most other forums. I am anxious to see more posters interacting, as some (like Abbey in this thread) seem to offer actual discussion.

-- You jest .. ?

If you mean the Muslim poster I think you do .. and it's rather hard to see how you can't ! .. then I suggest you review the apparent 'survey' that you've done of other threads involving said poster. You will find, again and again, challenges made that are GROUNDED in fact. Such as, to take an example, the non-peaceful nature of Islam. In the past 24 hours or so, for example, a particularly meritorious listing of Koranic quotes has been posted showing example after example of the hate-filled and hate-inducing nature of Islam itself, some positively warlike.

The poster you must have in mind insists that Muslims pursuing terrorism who say they are inspired by Islam and acting in the furtherance of it cannot actually be Muslims at all. Yet, contrary evidence exists, and has very recently been offered.

May I suggest that you observe the activities involving said poster a little more objectively.

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=661880#post661880)
Arbo's further FAIL regarding Mithra...



Oh my, a religious organization that is standing up for itself and saying it has nothing to do with previous religions. That's about as unbiased as something could be. :rolleyes:

Interesting how you completely ignore the fact you never posted links to your 'sources', as required by board policy.

[Arbo]

-- You jest .. ?

If you mean the Muslim poster I think you do .. and it's rather hard to see how you can't ! .. then I suggest you review the apparent 'survey' that you've done of other threads involving said poster. You will find, again and again, challenges made that are GROUNDED in fact. Such as, to take an example, the non-peaceful nature of Islam. In the past 24 hours or so, for example, a particularly meritorious listing of Koranic quotes has been posted showing example after example of the hate-filled and hate-inducing nature of Islam itself, some positively warlike.

The poster you must have in mind insists that Muslims pursuing terrorism who say they are inspired by Islam and acting in the furtherance of it cannot actually be Muslims at all. Yet, contrary evidence exists, and has very recently been offered.

May I suggest that you observe the activities involving said poster a little more objectively.

I wasn't interested in the whole 'your religion is more violent than mine ever was' discussion. Not enough to pay much attention.

But how many Muslims are there in the world, and how many commit violent acts? I honestly ask as I don't know. I know any religious text can be 'abused', and most have throughout history. Not making excuses as I believe all terrorist minded folks should be rounded up in one spot and nuked off the face of the planet.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

When it comes to you telling a lie, the 'we' is you and I. As you needed to tell it in order to get the ball rolling down the hill of dishonesty.

Do you run on and on like this forever? As it is beyond boring already. Please drop the gay crap, there is no you and I .... BORING WOULD BE YOUR ATHEISTIC PROTEST AND ZEST TO REFUTE CHRISTIANS'S BELIEFS .. if there is no God why are you so interested in refuting a lie? Are you so caring that it hurts?:laugh: Get a clue hombre, I've faced a few dozen that took your same path and to tell you the truth it does bore me.. Step up your game a tad if you can. I fully expect you simply can not.. -Tyr

[Drummond]

I wasn't interested in the whole 'your religion is more violent than mine ever was' discussion. Not enough to pay much attention.

But how many Muslims are there in the world, and how many commit violent acts? I honestly ask as I don't know. I know any religious text can be 'abused', and most have throughout history. Not making excuses as I believe all terrorist minded folks should be rounded up in one spot and nuked off the face of the planet.

You'd rather deal with symptoms, then, than make any real attempt to tackle a disease at its source ?

'All terrorist minded folks' .. meaning .. what ? Terrorists themselves ? Those predisposed to joining a group ? Those harbouring 'terrorist thoughts' ? Those who'd willingly be terrorist enablers ?

I grant you, terrorists known to be such need to be dealt with. On that point, we apparently share agreement. Nonetheless, the very nature of the enemy ALSO needs to be recognised, the magnitude of the problem likewise, so that the proper and sustained confrontation doesn't fizzle out like a damp squib.

America saw its '9/11'. Britain saw its '7'7'. These attacks, though not forgotten, also lose their impact in the minds' eye over time. With no conscious understanding of what those attacks stemmed from, or no real caring as to what more they signify .. then, history may one day repeat itself .. I say, AVOIDABLY.

The more obviously militant of Muslims have ambitions for the furtherance of their creed. People such as Anjem Choudary, who openly declare their wish to see Islam rule Mankind in every country. Choudary wants universal Sharia Law, and the death of democracy. He's been interviewed stating that he expects America to become dominated by Sharia. I suggest this: Islam is easily the most aggressive faith this world has ever seen, and - by whatever creeping degrees it's brought about - the direction it takes is a remorseless one. It DOES advance in countries where Muslim communities take hold. It DOES demand greater, and ever greater, capitulations to it on every level that can be arranged.

I ask: HOW MUCH IS TOO MUCH ?

It isn't enough just to trim away at the outer edges of the problem by dealing with symptoms. The War on Terror should NEVER slacken, not until the single conscious thought penetrates all Muslim minds .. dreams of ideological conquest WILL FAIL.

I further ask: how is lack of consciousness of the nature of democracy's enemies at all helpful in rebutting their perniciousness ?

Think on that.

[Arbo]

You'd rather deal with symptoms, then, than make any real attempt to tackle a disease at its source ?

What is your solution? Ban Islam?


America saw its '9/11'. Britain saw its '7'7'. These attacks, though not forgotten, also lose their impact in the minds' eye over time. With no conscious understanding of what those attacks stemmed from, or no real caring as to what more they signify .. then, history may one day repeat itself .. I say, AVOIDABLY.

History WILL repeat itself. It is only a matter of when.

BTW, I have gone nowhere, I just turned off some worthless noise.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

-- Didn't last long, did you ?

How 'sad' ... I made this post ,his next reply was to run.
Please drop the gay crap, there is no you and I .... BORING WOULD BE YOUR ATHEISTIC PROTEST AND ZEST TO REFUTE CHRISTIANS'S BELIEFS .. if there is no God why are you so interested in refuting a lie? Are you so caring that it hurts? Get a clue hombre, I've faced a few dozen that took your same path and to tell you the truth it does bore me.. Step up your game a tad if you can. I fully expect you simply can not.. -Tyr He is not the first to run from me and damn sure will not be the last. When they can not even start to score against you they run after trumping up an excuse. I said that he/she(?) would run and now it has. The first attack came from him where he decided rather than face me he'd just summarily dismiss me as a useless poster. Not only a weak excuse but one based upon enormous arrogance too. As if he is some godlike authority on the quality of the members here. My guess is this person is young and full of self to the point of being obnoxious. Not really sad , more like expected! Marcus appears to have this person figured out and Kat suggested its a troll not worthy of anybody's attention but I gave the benefit of the doubt only to find out she was right and the first to see it. Very smart and has woman's intuition as well. I predict this joker will now flip back and forth in his remarks trying to please certain members . Already saw the start of just that. Time will tell big D, TIME WILL TELL. --Tyr

[Drummond]

What is your solution? Ban Islam?

Don't be absurd. Goals need to be evidently attainable.

With much sustained effort taking an appreciable extent of time ... what you'd ideally do is teach ambitious Islamists that their dream of world domination cannot progress. So, you teach them a series of lessons designed to demoralise them.

What you DON'T do is follow the Obama method of alternately displaying weakness, followed by actions which give the worst of them an outright advantage !!! Such as, declaring your troop withdrawal plans PUBLICLY, YEARS IN ADVANCE !! OR, TAKING ACTIONS WHICH WILL AID TERRORISTS DIRECTLY (such as the Syrian situation).


History WILL repeat itself. It is only a matter of when.

Translation: give up, sufficiently so, so as to hand innocent people some future death sentences.

That may be your 'solution'. IT IS NOT MINE.

[Arbo]

With much sustained effort taking an appreciable extent of time ... what you'd ideally do is teach ambitious Islamists that their dream of world domination cannot progress. So, you teach them a series of lessons designed to demoralise them.

Because extremist Islamists are so well known for learning lessons from the west?

You realize how silly that sounds? Hey, let's just teach them they can't have their way!

Bombing the crap out of them hasn't taught them a thing. And you give them too much credit in terms of the intelligence need to learn such a lesson. We are talking about people so backwards they don't even belong in modern times, they should have died out long ago due to their own stupidity.


Translation: give up, sufficiently so, so as to hand innocent people some future death sentences.

That may be your 'solution'. IT IS NOT MINE.

Your translation is incorrect. History will always repeat itself, because humans are STUPID. We have never learned from the past, and we keep doing the same dumb crap over and over. It is inevitable that there will be more terrorist attacks and we will not be able to stop them.

It has nothing to do with giving up, it has to do with being realistic. Those that think they are safe and secure become complacent, and then they get blown up.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Because extremist Islamists are so well known for learning lessons from the west?

You realize how silly that sounds? Hey, let's just teach them they can't have their way!

Bombing the crap out of them hasn't taught them a thing. .



Your translation is incorrect. History will always repeat itself, because humans are STUPID. We have never learned from the past, and we keep doing the same dumb crap over and over. It is inevitable that there will be more terrorist attacks and we will not be able to stop them.

It has nothing to do with giving up, it has to do with being realistic. Those that think they are safe and secure become complacent, and then they get blown up. Sure thing, lets teach them they CAN have their way.:rolleyes: And lets not bomb them instead lets let them keep bombing anybody they want and reap the benefit from more terror! :rolleyes: That's the ticket, teach we can not stop them so we must embrace them. You haven't figured out they only give two choices ! Submit or die. Not too much room in that for your nuances and appeasing suggestions. History has repeatedly shown that when people talk when they should have fought they become dead and soon defeated. --Tyr

[Gaffer]

Well, I certainly never told you to shut up, let alone to STFU. Not my style. I welcome debate and other opinions. What I personally do not like, are sweeping condescending statements, especially right off the bat. But you are not being silenced either way.

Every once in awhile, we get a new member who seems to be here primarily to attack Christianity in particular. It's really not all that hard to see it when that is going on. If that is not your agenda, great. :cool:

I often wonder why non-believers feel such a strong urge to convince others to not believe in God. If you really think about it, very few people try to proselytize others. And if that is true, why not live and let live? Our member Gaffer is a good example of someone who does that very well. (And I don't think a bad experience in someone's past justifies a continual need to go at strangers for their beliefs. At some point we all need to move on).

Was reading through up to here and I think I will make a comment. I am one that doesn't believe in religion. But I also respect those that do believe. And I NEVER insult their beliefs or act condescending. Well maybe a little bit with muslims. I agree with your point that you don't have to be religious to be moral. But the point is made and ends there. Saying someones belief is fantasy and mythology does not enhance your point in any way.

Tyr was totally correct in his OP. This country is going down the tubes because of morals. Those morals have to come from somewhere. If religion is the source, that's fine. Once someone has acquired morals then they can look more closely at where the morals come from. While I don't believe as many here do, I do learn from them. You might do better to listen, learn and keep your opinions of their beliefs to yourself.

Other than when it involves politics or events I don't see where an atheist has any business discussing religion, other than as a recruitment tool like queers do. Arbo, are you here to proselytize?

[jimnyc]

I have cleaned up this thread and moved the posts cluttering us up to this new one in the "cage" - http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?42782-Moral-Decay-decayed

I didn't pick out any posts, nor any specific members. I tried to start where things got a little personal and anything else that seemed off topic.

[Arbo]

You might do better to listen, learn and keep your opinions of their beliefs to yourself.

No offense, but that is pretty damn funny. Considering how many strike out at the beliefs of others in various threads.

[Drummond]

Because extremist Islamists are so well known for learning lessons from the west?

You realize how silly that sounds? Hey, let's just teach them they can't have their way!

It's a whole lot better than LETTING THEM have everything their way !

And bombing Al Qaeda in Afghanistan did teach them a lesson. They lost a lot of their members due to said members being blown to bits. Those that did survive took years to rebuild. In fact they were forced to rethink their entire organisational structure and strategy because of it.

Point me to another equivalent of '9/11', Arbo, that Al Qaeda has attempted since 2001 !! You know that you can't ...


Bombing the crap out of them hasn't taught them a thing.

I think I just showed you otherwise. Besides, it's not as though their enemies are in the habit of meting out such bombings, is it ? No .... if they've learned anything, it's that many in the West have lacked the resolve, or backbone, to KEEP UP THE MOMENTUM.

Teaching a lesson means that you TEACH IT, not just pontificate about it.


And you give them too much credit in terms of the intelligence need to learn such a lesson. We are talking about people so backwards they don't even belong in modern times, they should have died out long ago due to their own stupidity.

They may not be ultra-modern. But to dismiss Muslim terrorists, or such belligerents, as 'backwards' is dangerously naive. You're telling me that no Jihadist websites exist ? That no interest has ever been shown, or considered, by these 'backwards types' in acquiring WMD's ?

Closing your mind to dangerous possibilities just because you prefer to think that way, makes no sense.


Your translation is incorrect. History will always repeat itself, because humans are STUPID. We have never learned from the past, and we keep doing the same dumb crap over and over. It is inevitable that there will be more terrorist attacks and we will not be able to stop them.

Because you say so ?

For as long as people think as YOU SAY THEY MUST, perhaps. But to take a different, more proactive line, one more determined to FIGHT ONE'S ENEMIES ... that's the sane way to proceed.

[Arbo]

It's a whole lot better than LETTING THEM have everything their way !

Nobody is letting them.


I think I just showed you otherwise.

If your post is the standard of 'showing' something, the standard is just about non-existant.

Really, the rest of your post doesn't even dignify a response, it is empty headed rhetoric. Keep on thinking that another attack will never happen, that history will not repeat itself, but no crying when the next one happens.

[Drummond]

Nobody is letting them.

Troop withdrawals haven't been arranged in the Middle East ?

Obama won't take actions against Syria that'll aid them ?

Sorry, Arbo, I prefer to deal in facts than chosen preferences.


If your post is the standard of 'showing' something, the standard is just about non-existant.

Meaning, you've no good answer to give me.


Really, the rest of your post doesn't even dignify a response, it is empty headed rhetoric.

Run out of scope for responses ? Ah, well ...


Keep on thinking that another attack will never happen, that history will not repeat itself, but no crying when the next one happens.

Ever heard of taking charge of your own destiny ?

[Arbo]

Sorry, Arbo, I prefer to deal in facts than chosen preferences.

As of yet, I have seen you offer nothing beyond opinion.



Meaning, you've no good answer to give me.

No, meaning you saying 'it is this way because I said so and I say so because I say so', as you did, is not a valid argument.


Ever heard of taking charge of your own destiny ?

Ok, grace us with your ideas that will ensure that there is NEVER another terrorist attack. That ensures the world that there is never a world war. That ensures that in no way will we ever repeat the bad things that have happened in the past. I eagerly await this one.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Was reading through up to here and I think I will make a comment. I am one that doesn't believe in religion. But I also respect those that do believe. And I NEVER insult their beliefs or act condescending. Well maybe a little bit with muslims. I agree with your point that you don't have to be religious to be moral. But the point is made and ends there. Saying someones belief is fantasy and mythology does not enhance your point in any way.

Tyr was totally correct in his OP. This country is going down the tubes because of morals. Those morals have to come from somewhere. If religion is the source, that's fine. Once someone has acquired morals then they can look more closely at where the morals come from. While I don't believe as many here do, I do learn from them. You might do better to listen, learn and keep your opinions of their beliefs to yourself.
Other than when it involves politics or events I don't see where an atheist has any business discussing religion, other than as a recruitment tool like queers do. Arbo, are you here to proselytize? Thanks, Arbo's problem seems to be a general lack of comprehension skills. All the sources we conservatives here have linked in our posts apparently count as zero since Arbo decided we are doofus's that act purely on hate. One would have to be blind not to see that Arbo a newbie stomps right on in here and proceeds to act as if he has been a long time member with keen insight into each of our characters. That to me would indicate that he is either a sock or else an arrogant , egotistical prick. Neither one very worthy of the attention he has managed to get so far. I predicted we will see Arbo flip and flop as he tries to please certain members here. I remember another member that used to do that a lot, hmmmmm---Tyr

[Missileman]

We have plenty of churches --Tyr

Wouldn't you agree that likely, it's more churches than ever? And since that's the case, isn't it better to let people seek out religion on their own and not try to indoctrinate school children?

I agree that our public education needs an overhaul to get it back to reality, but I don't believe you need to get religion back into the schools as part of that overhaul.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Wouldn't you agree that likely, it's more churches than ever? And since that's the case, isn't it better to let people seek out religion on their own and not try to indoctrinate school children?

I agree that our public education needs an overhaul to get it back to reality, but I don't believe you need to get religion back into the schools as part of that overhaul. I am more for getting discipline back into schools and setting standards of learning that we had in the 1950/1960's.. Kids are being deliberately dumbed down and for this nation to survive and prosper that must be stopped. Allowing prayer back into school would be good but certainly not the most important thing. I'd happily settle for two of the three . :beer:-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

We have our moral decay here. Other places they have another side of the coin. Islam forces itself on citizens. -Tyr http://www.asianews.it/news-en/East-Java:-civil-servants-forced-to-pray-to-Allah-28902.html » 09/03/2013 13:44
INDONESIA - ISLAM
East Java: civil servants forced to pray to Allah
by Mathias Hariyadi
New rule came into effect on 26 August in Situbondo District. For District Chief Dadang Wigiarto, praying enhances collaboration and work "thanks to divine intervention." The rule requires officials to sign a register so that their participation can be verified. Political and community leaders have criticised the initiative, noting that praying is personal in nature and that any penalty should be removed.


Jakarta (AsiaNews) - A new regulation in an East Java district requiring all Muslim public servants, both men and women, to recite an Islamic prayer together before they start their workday has raised a storm of criticism and protest.

For Situbondo District Chief Dadang Wigiarto, it is important that employees gather in the mosque to recite the 'Sholat berjamaah' or common prayer in the local language, except staff on holiday or menstruating women.

In response to this, a group of district officials filed a formal complaint against the regulation; saying that praying is "personal" in nature and that no one can claim the power to impose it.

Syaiful Bahri, a member of the regional assembly, is leading the fight against compulsory prayer for public officials that District Chief Dadang Wigiarto imposed on 26 August 2013.

In his view, 'Sholat' has no connection with the government and no state body "may legislate" on the subject.

The recitation of the prayer, he insists, "gives no guarantee" that public officials will carry out their jobs better. It is a real "interference", as well as an abuse of power, by higher-ranking government officials in the lives of citizens and workers.

Across the country, the practice of Sholat berjamaah is not regulated by laws or regulations. In Situbondo District, officials often meet to pray at the Al-Abror mosque, which is located within the administrative district in the city centre.

However, the district boss is convinced that praying can improve the quality of work thanks "to a sort of divine intervention by Allah."

When they leave the mosque after the daily prayer, officials are required to sign a register to show that they complied with the requirement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------We abandon our morals and seek to destroy Christianity here we will end up with this as shown above. And Islam murders its opposition so no compromise and no mercy. America restore your ethics and your morailty before its restored the Islamic way. -Tyr

[Jeff]

My 'utter nonsense' was not about a non-religious person being able to be moral. It was about the 'hard if not' part. Most of the immoral people I have ever known were religious.

OK I was teetering until I read this, when they took prayer out of school the school went down hill, we now have teachers teaching utter lies ( for example , my now 19 year old son was taught in HS that WW2 is what started the great depression , yes the teacher was trying to say if we went to Iraq we would get into another depression , all to easy for liberals to lie just to make there point ) the crime in schools went rampant once God was taken from the schools , and lets not forget our CNC who didn't want God in the DNC at all ( until he realized many weren't happy about it other than the bleeding heart liberals who held signs saying if Jesus returns kill him again) yes I can call at least 5 votes he lost just for the sign ( of course he won anyway so it didn't matter ) but look at our country now, it is now OK to attack Christian or for blacks to attack whites ( well not OK just not reported by the Media because it will make them racist )

Arbo I hate to admit it but you should be 100% correct but it just isn't so , When this country decided to drop God from everything we nose dived and now we have a leader that when he tells you good morning ya have to check your watch to see what time it is because everyone knows he can't tell the truth, we are at the brinks of war to go fight with the people responsible for Benghazi ( no morals at all in DC, Take God away and this is what ya get ) I understand I have given you nothing but opinion here , but for what it is worth it is 50 years of opinion and I can still remember going to bed at night with the front door not only unlocked but wide open to allow the exhaust fan to pull the cool night air in , try doing that in NJ now a days , but back then most where ( in that area anyway ) Catholic's that had some morals

[Arbo]

I understand you and many believe that a 'god' is needed to make things better. Clearly I disagree. And I sorta think saying a 'god' is needed to make things and people 'better', kinda goes to my point about what religion was started for and is generally about. But no doubt you probably disagree.

BTW, I don't have to lock my doors, or close down the windows where I live. Perhaps it has more to do with population density than religion. Just something to think about.

[Jeff]

I understand you and many believe that a 'god' is needed to make things better. Clearly I disagree. And I sorta think saying a 'god' is needed to make things and people 'better', kinda goes to my point about what religion was started for and is generally about. But no doubt you probably disagree.

BTW, I don't have to lock my doors, or close down the windows where I live. Perhaps it has more to do with population density than religion. Just something to think about.

Arbo I am not sure of your age but I am getting old :laugh: ( not to bad ) but seriously if you had been to school when God was allowed there , there was respect in the schools there was structure , you didn't need police walking the halls , it was just a lot better

As for leaving doors open yes living out here in the country I could also but ya can't in most places anymore

[Drummond]

I understand you and many believe that a 'god' is needed to make things better. Clearly I disagree. And I sorta think saying a 'god' is needed to make things and people 'better', kinda goes to my point about what religion was started for and is generally about. But no doubt you probably disagree.

Interesting. You've tried to take me to task for posting only opinion. But doesn't it occur to you that what you've posted is ONLY that ?

What if there IS a God, and the blinkers are on you, and not others ?

[Drummond]

Ok, grace us with your ideas that will ensure that there is NEVER another terrorist attack. That ensures the world that there is never a world war. That ensures that in no way will we ever repeat the bad things that have happened in the past. I eagerly await this one.

Nothing in life is that certain, and even you should appreciate the truth of that without my pointing it out.

That's not to say that we're helpless, though, either.

There have been NO comparable attacks to 9/11 since that very attack .. well over a DECADE ago. Because terrorists are 'too kind' to mete another lot out, OR, because actions taken over this last decade have done a lot to discourage the possibility ??

What if the War on Terror, thus far, has so destabilised terrorism, kept it so preoccupied in its own backyard, that the capacity to attack in that manner has been stymied ?

And what if that effort ceases ? Will terrorists get enough of a breather to try it again ?

No. Effort to sustain the status quo is what's needed. A perpetual lesson in how futile it is for any terrorist to hope for the victories it seeks.

Will there ever be another World War ? I kind of doubt it, because I think Mankind already knows that nothing of the kind can ever be risked, considering today's weapons.

[aboutime]

Interesting. You've tried to take me to task for posting only opinion. But doesn't it occur to you that what you've posted is ONLY that ?

What if there IS a God, and the blinkers are on you, and not others ?


Sir Drummond. This appears to be another case of "jafar/Robert" mania developing, as it has many times before. So, it's useless to bother trying any discussions on such topics since Our Opinions are not acceptable to those who claim to have EVERY ANSWER.

[fj1200]

Arbo I am not sure of your age but I am getting old :laugh: ( not to bad ) but seriously if you had been to school when God was allowed there , there was respect in the schools there was structure , you didn't need police walking the halls , it was just a lot better

As for leaving doors open yes living out here in the country I could also but ya can't in most places anymore

For the first part I'm going to guess that is more correlation than causation. I'm blame libs, not the lack of God. :poke:

And the second part I live in an urban area and I leave the doors unlocked on occasion. Of course that's something that we can do until we can't not that there haven't been issues on occasion in the neighborhood.

[Arbo]

Arbo I am not sure of your age but I am getting old :laugh: ( not to bad ) but seriously if you had been to school when God was allowed there , there was respect in the schools there was structure , you didn't need police walking the halls , it was just a lot better

There was respect in the schools when I went, no police. We also did not have forced prayers or any of that. Seemed to go just fine.


As for leaving doors open yes living out here in the country I could also but ya can't in most places anymore

I don't live in the country, I am in a city. Small, but still a city.

[Arbo]

What if there IS a God, and the blinkers are on you, and not others ?

Then I get to go to where all the hot nasty girls are, sounds like fun to me.


Nothing in life is that certain,

Indeed. And no amount of preventative measure can ensure history does not repeat itself. That was the point.

[aboutime]

Then I get to go to where all the hot nasty girls are, sounds like fun to me.



Indeed. And no amount of preventative measure can ensure history does not repeat itself. That was the point.


Hot, nasty girls until you discover the "Than Fran Thisco", pretend world of Wannabe's with Peckers.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Indeed. And no amount of preventative measure can ensure history does not repeat itself. That was the point. Just who did you think didn't know that peace in the future can not be guaranteed ? Drummond points out that murdering, terrorist force must be opposed not placated. What exactly are you putting forth?--Tyr

[Arbo]

Just who did you think didn't know that peace in the future can not be guaranteed ? Drummond points out that murdering, terrorist force must be opposed not placated. What exactly are you putting forth?--Tyr

I shall repeat what I originally said:

"History WILL repeat itself. It is only a matter of when."

To which Drummond argued:

"But to take a different, more proactive line, one more determined to FIGHT ONE'S ENEMIES ... that's the sane way to proceed."

So it appears offense was taken to the reality that history will repeat itself, and he countered by saying we must be more proactive and determined. Which doesn't guarantee that history will not be repeated, but he seemed to keep arguing that 'his' stance would prevent such a thing.

So to answer your last question, I put forth exactly what I quoted myself as saying above. Why someone found that something to argue with makes no sense to me.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Back to the subject of this thread. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------America has now sank to a very low level because corruption was acclaimed instead of being condemned. Heralded in movies and praised by media the triumph of evil over good was made to be quite enticing . At no point in our history has the Federal government been so corrupt... This is clearly a manifestation of moral breakdown. Inadequate to simply say that it is clear to all decent Americans that the basic problem of the nation is a moral one. This moral problem, which is basically the problem of corruption, is the root cause of all our social, political and economic problems . Our country has been blessed by God with both natural and great human resources , which are enough to make the country great and make life in it comfortable for all its citizens, but that has been so distorted because of big government power grabbing and corruption that has become a systematic plague. The obvious fruits of this great and massive degradation have allowed such an egotistical madman as Obama to assume power with the sheeple's blessings. Thus the prevalence of corruption betrays a latent decay in our ethical values and orientation. It shows our attempts to hold on to our foundational values , political stability , religious and ethical principles of justice, transparency, altruism, accountability and a civic oriented notion of leadership greatly eroded and under constant fire! It shows a leadership agenda that promotes the selfish interest of a selected few at the expense of the common good which has often been acclaimed by philosophers as the essence of the formation of Western political society and a freedom based culture. The many effects of corruption in America show vividly in the degradation of our highways, bridges, school systems, hospitals , poor infrastructure, increasing crime rate, increased number of drug gangs, political bandits, election fraud, racial division, etc! We are at the crossroads and have just been led down the wrong path. Question is do we have the good sense to reverse course or will we trudge along blindly following a leader that knows the bridge ahead is out and hopes to waste us in the wilderness along the way too? --Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I shall repeat what I originally said:

"History WILL repeat itself. It is only a matter of when."

To which Drummond argued:

"But to take a different, more proactive line, one more determined to FIGHT ONE'S ENEMIES ... that's the sane way to proceed."

So it appears offense was taken to the reality that history will repeat itself, and he countered by saying we must be more proactive and determined. Which doesn't guarantee that history will not be repeated, but he seemed to keep arguing that 'his' stance would prevent such a thing.

So to answer your last question, I put forth exactly what I quoted myself as saying above. Why someone found that something to argue with makes no sense to me. Yes but his comment by my understanding was that we still must strive to prevent any negative repeats like say another world war. And to be proactive and not fatalistic. To which I whole heartedly agree. Are you saying since its inevitable then why be proactive in defending against it? Or against the evil actions of those in the past being replicated in the future? The question seems to be what is your point about history repeating itself? Is it don't try to stop it because such is doomed to failure? If that's it I strongly disagree for man's life is about attempting to mold a better future despite history showing so many massive failures. Giving up is not an option IMHO. Neither is adopting a fatalistic attitude on life and planning for the future. Haven't you heard, that nothing is guaranteed except death and taxes? Drummond's faith that being proactive may yield GOOD OR EVEN BETTER results seems logical since not attempting such would insure an even quicker repeat. As man is a creature of habit and carnal vices that lead and have lead to history's massive failures and misery prove that to be true IMHO.-Tyr

[aboutime]

I shall repeat what I originally said:

"History WILL repeat itself. It is only a matter of when."

To which Drummond argued:

"But to take a different, more proactive line, one more determined to FIGHT ONE'S ENEMIES ... that's the sane way to proceed."

So it appears offense was taken to the reality that history will repeat itself, and he countered by saying we must be more proactive and determined. Which doesn't guarantee that history will not be repeated, but he seemed to keep arguing that 'his' stance would prevent such a thing.

So to answer your last question, I put forth exactly what I quoted myself as saying above. Why someone found that something to argue with makes no sense to me.



More correctly, as the expression goes.

"If you fail to remember History. You are doomed to repeat it".

We can control it if we do not ignore it.

[Drummond]

Yes but his comment by my understanding was that we still must strive to prevent any negative repeats like say another world war. And to be proactive and not fatalistic. To which I whole heartedly agree. Are you saying since its inevitable then why be proactive in defending against it? Or against the evil actions of those in the past being replicated in the future? The question seems to be what is your point about history repeating itself? Is it don't try to stop it because such is doomed to failure? If that's it I strongly disagree for man's life is about attempting to mold a better future despite history showing so many massive failures. Giving up is not an option IMHO. Neither is adopting a fatalistic attitude on life and planning for the future. Haven't you heard, that nothing is guaranteed except death and taxes? Drummond's faith that being proactive may yield GOOD OR EVEN BETTER results seems logical since not attempting such would insure an even quicker repeat. As man is a creature of habit and carnal vices that lead and have lead to history's massive failures and misery prove that to be true IMHO.-Tyr:clap::clap::clap:

Thanks, Tyr. You've got my meaning exactly. We're in complete agreement.:beer:

[Jeff]

For the first part I'm going to guess that is more correlation than causation. I'm blame libs, not the lack of God. :poke:
And that is your opion and you are entilited to it
And the second part I live in an urban area and I leave the doors unlocked on occasion. Of course that's something that we can do until we can't not that there haven't been issues on occasion in the neighborhood.
Well I now know ya don't live on the west side of Hotlanta :laugh:

There was respect in the schools when I went, no police. We also did not have forced prayers or any of that. Seemed to go just fine.

We never had forced prayer either, when we did pray it was because we wanted to , a big difference right there alone

I don't live in the country, I am in a city. Small, but still a city.

I have seen some small cities ( actually I have seen many having traveled across this great Country or our once Great Country ) and have found when someone describes there city as a small city they rally have no idea what a city is ( and no I am not attacking , it is just hard for me to understand what a small city is , like here in the South ( fj will understand ) I have a friend that is a police officer that worked in Commerce GA and he told me he was tired of working the big city :laugh: Commerce is nothing more than a country town with a Walmart a Home Depot and some restaurants and I must not forget the outlet mall, when my brother from NY comes down he calls it the sticks :laugh:

[Kathianne]

Well I now know ya don't live on the west side of Hotlanta :laugh:


I have seen some small cities ( actually I have seen many having traveled across this great Country or our once Great Country ) and have found when someone describes there city as a small city they rally have no idea what a city is ( and no I am not attacking , it is just hard for me to understand what a small city is , like here in the South ( fj will understand ) I have a friend that is a police officer that worked in Commerce GA and he told me he was tired of working the big city :laugh: Commerce is nothing more than a country town with a Walmart a Home Depot and some restaurants and I must not forget the outlet mall, when my brother from NY comes down he calls it the sticks :laugh:

By sociological definition, a 'city' has a population of over 20k. In major urban areas though, that would be a very small suburb. Most of Chicago suburbs with populations under 40k have designation of village. Now in rural areas, a municipality approaching 20k, would likely be a major local destination. Better groceries, more banks, better shopping, bigger library, etc.

A lot has to do with the 'greater statistical area' your region is.

[fj1200]

Well I now know ya don't live on the west side of Hotlanta :laugh:


Tru dat. :eek: Our little corner of the world is awesome though even with the ineptness of our county, school system, and Congressional Representative.

[Jeff]

Tru dat. :eek: Our little corner of the world is awesome though even with the ineptness of our county, school system, and Congressional Representative.

OK the tru dat has me wondering now :laugh:, seriously cities are not for me at all, I grew up not far from NYC and I can count on one hand how many times I went there just to hang out ( not going for work was a different story ) But as far as cities go Atlanta does have some very nice spots , one on Peach tree ( wait isn't there like 118 Peach tree streets :laugh: ) all kidding a side Atlanta is in most area's a nice place

[Arbo]

Are you saying since its inevitable then why be proactive in defending against it?

I am not saying it, nor did I in any way suggest such a thing. I merely said that no matter what, history will repeat itself, as humans in general are apathetic and lazy.


Is it don't try to stop it because such is doomed to failure?

This seems like the same question as the first. The answer is the same. No matter what precautions you put forth, no matter what effort, there will be attacks in the future.

[Arbo]

I have seen some small cities ( actually I have seen many having traveled across this great Country or our once Great Country ) and have found when someone describes there city as a small city they rally have no idea what a city is ( and no I am not attacking , it is just hard for me to understand what a small city is , like here in the South ( fj will understand ) I have a friend that is a police officer that worked in Commerce GA and he told me he was tired of working the big city :laugh: Commerce is nothing more than a country town with a Walmart a Home Depot and some restaurants and I must not forget the outlet mall, when my brother from NY comes down he calls it the sticks :laugh:

This city/town, is 'officially' a city per legal definition. The city itself has a population of a bit over 16k people. The entire county is about 35k people. So it is the biggest spot in the county.

[Jeff]

This city/town, is 'officially' a city per legal definition. The city itself has a population of a bit over 16k people. The entire county is about 35k people. So it is the biggest spot in the county.

I am very happy for ya, hope ya don't get lost on the subway :laugh: seriously man you know what I mean, but if you wish to use it as a city more power to ya ( like I said we must choose our battles :laugh: and only debate what we feel worth it )

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/w_k_clifford/ethics_of_belief.html ----------------------- There was once an island in which some of the inhabitants professed a religion teaching neither the doctrine of original sin nor that of eternal punishment. A suspicion got abroad that the professors of this religion had made use of unfair means to get their doctrines taught to children. They were accused of wresting the laws of their country in such a way as to remove children from the care of their natural and legal guardians; and even of stealing them away and keeping them concealed from their friends and relations. A certain number of men formed themselves into a society for the purpose of agitating the public about this matter. They published grave accusations against individual citizens of the highest position and character, and did all in their power to injure these citizens in their exercise of their professions. So great was the noise they made, that a Commission was appointed to investigate the facts; but after the Commission had carefully inquired into all the evidence that could be got, it appeared that the accused were innocent. Not only had they been accused on insufficient evidence, but the evidence of their innocence was such as the agitators might easily have obtained, if they had attempted a fair inquiry. After these disclosures the inhabitants of that country looked upon the members of the agitating society, not only as persons whose judgment was to be distrusted, but also as no longer to be counted honourable men. For although they had sincerely and conscientiously believed in the charges they had made, yet they had no right to believe on such evidence as was before them. Their sincere convictions, instead of being honestly earned by patient inquiring, were stolen by listening to the voice of prejudice and passion.

Let us vary this case also, and suppose, other things remaining as before, that a still more accurate investigation proved the accused to have been really guilty. Would this make any difference in the guilt of the accusers? Clearly not; the question is not whether their belief was true or false, but whether they entertained it on wrong grounds. They would no doubt say, "Now you see that we were right after all; next time perhaps you will believe us." And they might be believed, but they would not thereby become honourable men. They would not be innocent, they would only be not found out. Every one of them, if he chose to examine himself in foro conscientiae, would know that he had acquired and nourished a belief, when he had no right to believe on such evidence as was before him; and therein he would know that he had done a wrong thing.
Read this and consider Obama and his actions as you do. -Tyr

[Arbo]

Read this and consider Obama and his actions as you do. -Tyr

Compare an imaginary scenario to the real world? Is there a point?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Compare an imaginary scenario to the real world? Is there a point? If you have to ask, well you know...... well on second thought obviously you wouldn't. :laugh:--Tyr

[Arbo]

If you have to ask, well you know...... well on second thought obviously you wouldn't. :laugh:--Tyr

So what you are saying is there is no point. It's a random bit of text taken from a book with no relation to modern times. Thanks.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So what you are saying is there is no point. It's a random bit of text taken from a book with no relation to modern times. Thanks. :laugh:

[Arbo]

:laugh:

So just like the impeachment thread, you have failed to support anything you have typed. A trend.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Back on topic... Americans know that liberals teaching that the bible is false has lead to the greater part of our moral decay... Check this link out for more... --Tyr
http://www.churchleaders.com/pastors/pastor-articles/166460-77-of-Americans-Think-Morality-Is-on-the-Decline-%E2%80%94-And-One-in-Three-Think-the-Bible-Is-the-Answer.html 77% of Americans Think Morality Is on the Decline — And One in Three Think the Bible Is the Answer The findings are reported in American Bible Society's annual State of the Bible survey. The report details Americans' beliefs about the Bible, its role in society, its presence in U.S. homes and more. As in previous years, the survey found that the Bible remains a highly valued, influential force in America.

But beliefs about the Bible and its role in society are becoming increasingly polarized — particularly when the data is examined by age group.

The research also uncovered a significant disconnect in belief versus behavior. While 66 percent of those surveyed agreed that the Bible contains everything a person needs to know to live a meaningful life, 58 percent say they do not personally want wisdom and advice from the Bible, and about the same amount (57 percent) read it fewer than five times per year.

The State of the Bible 2013 survey, conducted by Barna Group on behalf of American Bible Society, found that:
•
The Bible continues to dominate both mind space and book retail space as America’s undisputed best-seller.

◦
1 in 6 people reported buying a copy of the Bible in the last year.

◦
80 percent of Americans identify the Bible as sacred.

◦
Americans have plenty of copies at their fingertips — an average of 4.4 Bibles per household.

•
56 percent of adults believe the Bible should have a greater role in U.S. society.

•
But actual Bible reading and perceptions about the Bible have become increasingly polarized, with 6 million new Bible antagonists in the last year alone.

•
More than half (57 percent) of those ages 18–28 report reading the Bible less than three times a year or never.

•
While those ages 18–28 are the least likely age group to read the Bible, they are the most interested in receiving input and wisdom from it on several topics including:

◦
Parenting (42 percent, compared to 22 percent of all adults)

[revelarts]

Back on topic... ..... Check this link out for more... --Tyr

May the desire increase and spread.